|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jan 14, 2021 17:59:29 GMT
I haven't read any of the previous replies. This is so I can put in my own speculations without influence. 1. Strange sightings, noises etc. that people tend to feel the need to make up explanations for. 2. People wanting to think their loved ones are visiting them after death 3. The idea catching on through other people and in popular culture and entering the mass consciousness Essentially the correct answer. I'd also add an innate tendency to anthropomorphize causes behind mysteries. It's also why when humans were first trying to explain natural disasters they invented gods who controlled them. Ghosts are just another version of that, but this time connected to concepts of an afterlife and more mundane mysteries. That is also correct. Coincidentally I was reading about something similar last night. It was talking about how humans use to apply agency to everything. We still do it to an extent, but we are doing it knowing their isn't agency, like yelling at your computer when it isn't working and calling it stupid and stuff like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jan 14, 2021 18:01:56 GMT
The movie "Ghost" came to mind immediately while reading this. He is given a choice to go to Heaven or stay behind, but he has unfinished business before moving on and so he chooses to stay behind. So this movie puts a positive twist on it. He gets to say goodbye to his wife and solve his own murder. Yes, and like I mentioned earlier, it is about being caught up in limbo but also aware of it. There is still unfinished business to do and as in the context of the film, Sam was taken away arbitrarily and needed resolution not only for his own being, but for Molly as well. Yup.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 14, 2021 18:11:11 GMT
Essentially the correct answer. I'd also add an innate tendency to anthropomorphize causes behind mysteries. It's also why when humans were first trying to explain natural disasters they invented gods who controlled them. Ghosts are just another version of that, but this time connected to concepts of an afterlife and more mundane mysteries. That is also correct. Coincidentally I was reading about something similar last night. It was talking about how humans use to apply agency to everything. We still do it to an extent, but we are doing it knowing their isn't agency, like yelling at your computer when it isn't working and calling it stupid and stuff like that. Even Richard Dawkins has talked about this being a problem for scientists when trying to communicate science to the general public. He was using the example of evolutionary biology and talking about how when he called his book "The Selfish Gene" he didn't anticipate how easy it would be for people to misunderstand evolution merely by giving it a human quality like selfishness (especially when he clarified this in his book on the subject). I think a certain amount of this is inevitable. Humans do a lot of their thinking in metaphors, especially when it comes to understanding the natural world, and the easiest metaphors to reach for are the most intuitive ones derived from our own nature. The difficulty is in getting people to realize that metaphors aren't perfect analogs to reality and that we should avoid forming whole theories--like ghosts and the paranormal--out of such tendencies.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jan 14, 2021 18:18:41 GMT
That is also correct. Coincidentally I was reading about something similar last night. It was talking about how humans use to apply agency to everything. We still do it to an extent, but we are doing it knowing their isn't agency, like yelling at your computer when it isn't working and calling it stupid and stuff like that. Even Richard Dawkins has talked about this being a problem for scientists when trying to communicate science to the general public. He was using the example of evolutionary biology and talking about how when he called his book "The Selfish Gene" he didn't anticipate how easy it would be for people to misunderstand evolution merely by giving it a human quality like selfishness (especially when he clarified this in his book on the subject). I think a certain amount of this is inevitable. Humans do a lot of their thinking in metaphors, especially when it comes to understanding the natural world, and the easiest metaphors to reach for are the most intuitive ones derived from our own nature. The difficulty is in getting people to realize that metaphors aren't perfect analogs to reality and that we should avoid forming whole theories--like ghosts and the paranormal--out of such tendencies. I agree. I think it tends to confuse some of the public, such as when biologists use analogies when talking about DNA.
|
|
|
|
Post by OpiateOfTheMasses on Jan 14, 2021 22:54:15 GMT
According to Sam Jackson's character in 1408, it's because it lets us believe there is something after death. But is life as a ghost really all that rewarding? Heaven, reincarnation and the like, sure that makes sense. But ghosts are almost the antithesis of that, aren't they? You could almost start to make the opposite point, that maybe ghosts are real because it's not some pie in the sky fantasy that we would just make up and believe in?  ? Heaven doesn't make sense. It's eternity. An infinite amount of time anywhere, doing anything would be an unimaginable torture. You would have gone completely insane within a few million years from the tedium of it all. And then you still have infinity left to go. It's a concept of a reward dreamt up by simple minded people who don't really understand the concept of infinity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 15, 2021 15:21:02 GMT
Even Richard Dawkins has talked about this being a problem for scientists when trying to communicate science to the general public. He was using the example of evolutionary biology and talking about how when he called his book "The Selfish Gene" he didn't anticipate how easy it would be for people to misunderstand evolution merely by giving it a human quality like selfishness (especially when he clarified this in his book on the subject). I think a certain amount of this is inevitable. Humans do a lot of their thinking in metaphors, especially when it comes to understanding the natural world, and the easiest metaphors to reach for are the most intuitive ones derived from our own nature. The difficulty is in getting people to realize that metaphors aren't perfect analogs to reality and that we should avoid forming whole theories--like ghosts and the paranormal--out of such tendencies. Yet what can be perfect? Many who don't have an expertise interest or understanding of scientific academia and knowledge of physics and probabilities et all, is it not best to keep something grounded in what can be connected too on layman's terms. The metaphor or symbolism can lead into clarity of understanding. Nothing can be perfect since humans don't have access to reality "as-it-is" anyway. We just have some methods (science, rationality, etc.) that's better at accurately modeling what we do experience. For people lacking expertise and interest in science and rationality, my biggest advice would be "learn to say 'I don't know' and accept uncertainty." I think that's good advice in general. The entire reason that myths and folklore exist is because people have an innate need to explain mysteries, but don't have the rationality to test their explanations to see if they're true, and before you know it we've built these huge edifices that people devote a lot of time and often money to. I do agree that metaphoric/symbolic thinking can lead to clarity, and any teacher will tell you that if you can relate subjects to students' own experiences it's much easier for them to learn it. There's just the danger of accepting all aspects of the metaphor as truth. Metaphors by their very nature only draw certain "grounds" between the "vehicle" and "tenor" (to use the technical poetry terms).
|
|
?